Does rising income increase or decrease damage risk from natural disasters?

被引:235
作者
Kellenberg, Derek K. [1 ]
Mobarak, Ahmed Mushfiq [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Montana, Dept Econ, Missoula, MT 59812 USA
[2] Yale Univ, Sch Management, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
关键词
economic development; natural disaster; Kuznets curve; urbanization;
D O I
10.1016/j.jue.2007.05.003
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Recent empirical literature has found a negative relationship between income per capita and measures of risk from natural disaster, supportive of logic that higher incomes allow countries to mitigate disaster risk. We argue that behavioral changes at the micro level in response to increasing income (such as location choice and extent of costly abatement activity) may lead to a non-linear relationship between aggregate incomes and disaster damages, where the risks increase with income before they decrease. In a country-year panel data set, we show that disaster risk associated with flooding, landslides and windstorms increases with income up to GDP per capita levels of $5044, $3360, and $4688 per year respectively and decrease thereafter. Such non-linear impacts are absent for other disaster types such as extreme temperature events and earthquakes where the links between human behavioral choices and exposure to risk are not as strong. From a policy perspective, this suggests that for the least developed countries, the dual goals of disaster risk prevention and economic development cannot be assumed to be complementary for all forms of natural disaster. In addition to allocating resources to manage disaster risk, the poorest nations may have to be more proactive in enacting policies that alter the behavioral choices of citizens that impact a country's exposure to natural disaster risk. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:788 / 802
页数:15
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Adger WN, 1999, WORLD DEV, V27, P249, DOI 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00136-3
[2]   Earthquake fatalities: the interaction of nature and political economy [J].
Anbarci, N ;
Escaleras, M ;
Register, CA .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2005, 89 (9-10) :1907-1933
[3]  
AUSTIN T, 2004, J ENVIRON PLANN MAN, V47, P137
[4]  
BENDIMERAD F, 2000, MEGACITIES MEGARISK
[5]   A TEST OF THE EXPECTED UTILITY MODEL - EVIDENCE FROM EARTHQUAKE RISKS [J].
BROOKSHIRE, DS ;
THAYER, MA ;
TSCHIRHART, J ;
SCHULZE, WD .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1985, 93 (02) :369-389
[6]  
Copeland B.R., 2003, Trade and the environment: theory and evidence
[7]  
Cossette H., 2003, N. Am. Actuarial J, V7, P1, DOI [10.1080/10920277.2003.10596114, DOI 10.1080/10920277.2003.10596114]
[8]   The basis risk of catastrophic-loss index securities [J].
Cummins, JD ;
Lalonde, D ;
Phillips, RD .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 2004, 71 (01) :77-111
[9]   Confronting the environmental Kuznets curve [J].
Dasgupta, S ;
Laplante, B ;
Wang, H ;
Wheeler, D .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2002, 16 (01) :147-168
[10]   ECONOMIC-GROWTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT [J].
GROSSMAN, GM ;
KRUEGER, AB .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1995, 110 (02) :353-377